Summary:
When this was rewritten in D43737, the logic changed to better explore infinite loops. The check for a reachable exit block was deleted which accidentally introduced false positives in case the exit node was unreachable.
We were testing for cases like this, but @steven_wu provided an additional test case that I've included in the regression tests for this patch.
Reviewers: steven_wu, rtrieu
Reviewed By: steven_wu, rtrieu
Subscribers: cfe-commits, steven_wu
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D58122
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@353984
91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-
96231b3b80d8
CFG *cfg = AC.getCFG();
if (!cfg) return;
+ // If the exit block is unreachable, skip processing the function.
+ if (cfg->getExit().pred_empty())
+ return;
+
// Emit diagnostic if a recursive function call is detected for all paths.
if (checkForRecursiveFunctionCall(FD, cfg))
S.Diag(Body->getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_infinite_recursive_function);
return 5 + j();
}
-void k() { // expected-warning{{call itself}}
+// Don't warn on infinite loops
+void k() {
while(true) {
k();
}
}
-// Don't warn on infinite loops
void l() {
while (true) {}
l();
}
+void m() {
+ static int count = 5;
+ if (count >0) {
+ count--;
+ l();
+ }
+ while (true) {}
+}
+
class S {
static void a();
void b();